Middle-court needed now to judge impact on prisons

Five years ago, Gov. Mark Sanford directed me to work with legislators to propose an alternative sentencing bill. We did so, but the bill found little legislative interest.

So I was pleased to learn about proposed legislation that will do just that, creating a mid-level court akin to current drug courts. While the bill is a working proposal, I applaud Attorney General Henry McMaster and legislative leaders for these efforts.

My only concern about this proposal is the suggestion that passage of this great idea should be tied to passage of a no parole/truth-in-sentencing bill. A middle court with alternative sentencing is a meritorious idea. It is needed now and passing it now will allow us to be smarter with other sentencing changes in the future.

The proposal is timely. A recent Pew Research study reports that we have over 2.3 million people incarcerated in state and federal prisons and jails. We now lead most advanced nations in incarceration rates.

The news is actually worse for South Carolina. We lock up more of our citizens than most other states, but we make up for it by spending less than any other state on prisons.

In fact, our immediate problems are even more dire than these facts suggest. Our inmate population is already growing by 300-400 inmates a year and we are operating at more than 100 percent capacity.

From the date that funding is authorized, the site selection, engineering, construction and staffing of a new prison takes three years. At present, we have no prisons under construction, nothing on the drawing board and no funding. And, as we have already informed lawmakers, if our current budget is cut next year, we will be forced to close one or more prisons to avoid a deficit.

My point is this: Independent of any additional no-parole/or truth-in-sentencing legislation, lawmakers need to ensure that we make the best and highest use of our limited prison space. Currently, 48 percent of our inmates are in prison for non-violent offenses and have no previous conviction for violent crimes.

Lawmakers should pass the middle-court bill now, so that we can determine its impact on our growth rate and our prison population. Unlike no-parole and truth in sentencing, our computers and statisticians cannot predict the impact of a middle court and alternative sentences. Here's why:

No-parole/TIS proposals are mandatory for certain crimes. They increase the average sentence length by predictable lengths of time. We have more than 10 years of experience with such changes. But we have no way of predicting how often prosecutors and judges will use the middle-court option. Because these options will not be mandatory, we cannot know what crimes will be affected or how often alternative sentences will be used. We have no way of knowing or predicting how many of those offenders will face revocation and go to prison for some reason. There are just too many variables.

Passing this middle-court bill now will allow us to determine its impact on our prison growth rate and population. The new alternative sentences may allow us to delay construction of new prisons or prevent a federal court from ordering mandatory releases when we become too overcrowded to operate safely.

Passing such a bill now will allow us to make wiser and more precise judgments about how far we want to go with more tough-on-crime legislation, such as truth-in-sentencing and no-parole laws.

Even without expanding no-parole and truth-in-sentencing laws, we are already playing with fire in terms of funding of and bed space and staffing at our prisons. Because lawmakers know that our prison system is the most efficient in the nation, they assume that our SCDC team can continue to protect our state from the consequences of continued budgetary neglect. That assumption is unfair to our dedicated employees. It penalizes great performance.

Our current inmate growth rate is like the proverbial train coming around the corner. It may be out of sight, but it is coming and not slowing down.

Historically, our Legislature has rejected any idea that could be construed as "soft on crime," regardless of how smart the proposal.

Middle-court and alternative sentencing present lawmakers with an opportunity to rise above that past.

These ideas are overdue. We need them now.

Joel Ozmint is director of the South Carolina Department of Corrections.